DDA to pay Rs 3L for allotting defective flat
The Delhi Development Authority has been directed by the state consumer commission here to pay Rs. 3 lakh as compensation to an allottee for notrectifying the defects in a flat allotted to him in 1996.delhi Updated: Mar 29, 2013 16:31 IST
The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) has been directed by the state consumer commission here to pay Rs. 3 lakh as compensation to an allottee for not
rectifying the defects in a flat allotted to him in 1996.
The Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission also pulled up the DDA for the "callous and inapt attitude" of its officers for not making the flat habitable due to which the allottee had to reside in a rented house for 17 years.
"The defects which have been pointed out by complainant in the flat allotted to him are substantial and cannot be said to be minor or cosmetic. Obviously, by the action of the DDA, complainant could not take possession of the flat in question on account of the callous and inapt attitude of the officers of the DDA leading to complainant to reside in a rented house.
"The complainant is deprived of possession of the house from February 1, 1996 and till today the property in question has not been made habitable by the callous attitude of DDA," a bench comprising members Salma Noor and V K Gupta said.
The commission also directed DDA to pay Rs. 3 lakh as compensation to the allottee, Delhi resident Pramod Pal Singh.
Singh had said in his complaint that he had paid the entire amount of nearly four lakh for the flat in Rohini here through six separate instalments by 1996 and he was allotted the accommodation in February 1996.
When he had gone to check his flat before moving in, he found that it lacked basic amenities and he wrote to the DDA more than 12 times regarding it, but the authority did not take any action to make the accommodation habitable, he had alleged.
DDA, in its defence, contended that the defects pointed out by the complainant in the flat allotted to him, have already been removed and it is the complainant who has not taken over the possession of the same.
The commission rejected the contention and said that during the proceedings, it had directed the DDA to make the house habitable, but no action was taken by the authority.